Why do console gamers settle for so little?

[Desert Tiger]

PC gamers need to come back down to earth. Your multiplayer is rife with cheaters, hackers and modders who abuse game code to win, your control system is far from superior it's just that you have practice more with that than a controller and are therefore better at it (shocking, practice has made you good at something..when does this happen?) and your systems fall out of date constantly.

Another misinformed moron who lumps modders in with cheaters and hackers. Seriously that bit jumped out the most and I immediately discounted everything else you wrote.

And lag comes in many forms, I've said this many times but people are too stupid to understand, lag is not always teleporting about the map. That can be compensated for in the coding, but one of my main gripes with online console gaming is the hit registration. Because there IS more lag on p2p play they usually make up for it by changing the hitboxes (defines where your bullets cause damage), either making them bigger or altering them in some way.

Little to no gains? How about: Better graphics, better performance, online communities, less lag issues in games, far greater longevity of games (mainly due to the online communities and modders who keep the games up to date), more responsive controls, more customisation, ability to repair and upgrade...

Really? One shot at the negative sides of modding, a side that you cannot deny exists and very often negatively affects online experience, will make you discredit an entire argument? I never said all modding was bad, but since we were on the topic of "negative sides of multiplayer" I included modding as something that can and does affect the online experience. I don't think that it required a shot at my intelligence, but don't worry, I know you were only trying to increase your false sense of superiority.

"Better Graphics"; Anti Aliasing has very little increase to appearance, and to deny that a 32" HD monitor set to highest standard with an HDMI cable is "good graphics" would be stupid at best. I've played many games on both my xbox and on a good gaming pc, and the differences were tiny.

"Better performance", "less lag in games"; My xbox never lags in a game or online, its performance is as good as it needs to be, since it will never have to do more than play a game or DVD. And online lag is more to do with the player's internet connection rather than the medium through which you are connecting.

"Online communities"; honestly, I've been a member of many different online communities for various reasons, some PC gamers, some Xbox and so on. While many of the xbox people are indeed, as Yahtzee favourably said, "a bunch of hooting dickholes", but the PC people were no better.

"Greater longevity of games"; I still have an N64, and there are people out there with even older consoles that still function and are used regularly. I doubt even constant modding could match up to that kind of longevity.

"More responsive controls"; As I said in my original post, I've used both, and now stick firmly to the controller that I am comfortable with and often use it on a PC against people using a mouse. I see no particular bias in either direction when I do, since it's down to the skill of the player, not how sensitive your mouse is.

"Ability to upgrade"; this leads me nicely onto:

Whereas I could spend the same amount of money just for the fucking graphics card on a PC, which the games released the year later would be pushed to support.

Well, that discredits you. I still have my 8800GTS I spent $250 on three years ago. It can still play today's games at 30fps on high.

Please don't make comments like that on things you don't know much about, especially in such a hostile nature. People will feel compelled to call you out on it.

Okay, so I exaggerated the cost slightly. £150 for a graphics card that's lasted you 3 years? I spent the same on an Xbox, 2 controllers and 3 games 2 and a half years ago, and it too has lasted me well. If that's just your graphics card, then I'm pretty sure that another piece of your rig could easily cover my television, and that would not even be your entire rigs cost covered. While I may have exaggerated, you have just nicely proven the point I was intending to make.

And the only person I was intending to be hostile to in that sentence was the makers of said overly expensive computer hardware.

I'm pretty sure the whole "turning a halo into a giant FAG sign" thing on TF2 is a pretty good example of a negative mod.

 

[dududf]

Another question could be why do PC gamers expect so much? *flameshield up*

The PC is capable of more, and we expect that they will take advantage of what the PC is capable of.

I think a Console gamer would be upset if a PS2/Xbox 1 game was made on the PS3 and 360, and then expecting you to be OK with it. Now make that a really good game, BUT still not living up to your consoles expectations, and you should begin to see why we are getting really irked.

Hope the above analogy isn't too weird/complicated/something-in-asgard. =]



TL;DR : We expect more, because we're capable of more.

 

[RoseBridge]

I dont know what your talking about I have only gotten lag at least 4 times in MW2 on xbox out of the hundreds of matches I've played., yes I would like more features like user generated content for games. but there are new things specifically for gold users, and it looks like earnest attempt to warrant the price.
And 32 v 32 is just stupid and really depends on the game anyway, it would be ridicules in MW2. I like a close knit team.

 

[dududf]

so you'll refute every honest word of mine as just being an attempt to "troll?" pfft. such things are below me.

truth is, i don't really know how much it costs, but i know i can't afford it seeing as i've already purchased a 360 with XBL and i'm sixteen working part time.

if you dont know then why not GOOGLE? what makes it worse is that you exaggerate to the point of blasphemy. gaming PCs are 400-600$ items, not thousands of dollars.

Show me a real gaming PC for $400-600, and ill show you Yahtzee's Triple-Cunted Hooker.

https://secure.newegg.com/WishList/MySavedWishDetail.aspx?ID=16561667
That rig supports DX11 and it'll smoke Crysis. Where's my hooker?

Dibs on her when you're done?
______________________________________________________________

Exactly. Also, some of us can only afford ONE computer, which we use professionally and have a concrete need of 100% reliability from, which means not sticking programs as unstable as games on it (not to mention DRM, which has not and will never be present on my computer in any form, which more or less locks me out of mainstream pc gaming anyway). As far as I'm concerned, my computer is a tool, my xbox is a toy. End of story.

Oh, please. Your computer isn't going to get bricked because you install games on it. You're just making excuses.

Agreed, and a very bad excuse as well.
________________________________________________________________

Another question could be why do PC gamers expect so much? *flameshield up*

I think you have it confused. It's not expecting so much when it's been the standard for good while now. It's a different experience and a really good one at that. Also why not have both options? Doesn't just have to be one or the other, they had both options in Generals.

Exactly.... Honestly, I wonder if that's why Console gamers think "We are all 'Elitists' because we expect more, because we are capable of more."

That'd be rather sad, and personally I see gaming going downhill after Infinity wards stunt, as dev's don't have to live to our standard, can push out crappier games =[



Also sorry for double post, didn't see these when I posted =O

 

[Daniel Cygnus]

As a PC/360 gamer, I can say I really don't mind matchmaking and limits on the 360. It seems to fit better with the console experience. When I play a console game online, I want to pick it up and go. I don't want to worry about finding a dedicated server that isn't bot-populated, elitist and full of regulars, or worst of all, empty.

Don't get me wrong, I have problems with matchmaking too, but it's best when played in short bursts, which is exactly what I use it for.

 

[cocoadog]

as a wise radio announcer from grand theft auto announcer once said "opinionated and moronic"

 

[Adrianis]

Man im so tired of seeing pc gamer threads hating on....oh wait i can press back!

I play both, and they both have respective bonuses. The social aspect of the 360 is so much damn easier than on pc, yes i know theres many free internet talky things on pc, and things like steam, but thats still extra effort than on console and frankly steam is unreliable for that and balls all in all imo. But hey thats opinion.

Cod 4 is a good example as i played lots on both versions - prefered the gameplay on PC, but bigger games although more fun didnt suit as well as 6 vs 6, and even 9 vs 9 on groundwar on console just seemed over the top once i got into the 360 version. Lag was always worse on pc (any game, long spanning pc game career), i only ever got lag on 360 on any game when the host lagged or left, then 20 secs and were back in.

Im a serious gamer, but you guys take this fight way too seriously, its all in opinion and console gamers can be serious gamers

 

[skywalkerlion]

Because I'm saving, like, thousands of dollars saved from getting tons of computer upgrades so I can run the games.

 

[dazdex]

Because we do, there. Can we please put a end to this endless supply of "Consoles suck" threads. We get it you don't like consoles, we are not bothered.

 

[Arbitrary Cidin]

Because it's both cheaper and supports split-screen, meaning I can play with my friends in real life. If you want to take this argument up, go to /v/ on 4chan. There's about a 70% that this exact thread is happening over there right now as you read this.

 

[LoopyDood]

Okay, so I exaggerated the cost slightly. £150 for a graphics card that's lasted you 3 years? I spent the same on an Xbox, 2 controllers and 3 games 2 and a half years ago, and it too has lasted me well. If that's just your graphics card, then I'm pretty sure that another piece of your rig could easily cover my television, and that would not even be your entire rigs cost covered. While I may have exaggerated, you have just nicely proven the point I was intending to make.

And the only person I was intending to be hostile to in that sentence was the makers of said overly expensive computer hardware.

If I'm not mistaken, the retail price of the base Xbox 360 was around $300 mid 2007. That's just the Xbox and the controller, with none of the expensive crap that you need to fully enjoy your console. You must have gotten a very, very good deal if your story is true. That would be a subjective experience that makes you a statistical outlier.

Thank you for bringing up the TV. What kind of a TV do you have? A tube TV from the 80's? If it's not a $1000+ HDTV you aren't even getting close to the same experience that I'm getting with my LCD monitor. The most expensive part of my system, by the way, is my monitor at $200 at the time of purchase. The image quality is far superior to even the extremely expensive HDTVs of the time. Show me a TV that's large enough for couch viewing and is capable of 1080p with a lower retail value than that, and I'll retract this statement. If you want to go cheaper than $1000 on the TV, why shouldn't the PC gamer go cheaper on his system and simply turn the graphics down?

So, for the full experience:
Base Xbox 360 with 1080p HDTV, no HD or Xbox Live stuff - $1300
Mid end PC with 1080p monitor, still far more powerful than a 360 - $800

And to the rest of that post - The sentiment of most of it seems to be "It's good enough for me, so it should be good enough for you."
By "Greater longevity of games", he means the logetivity of the online player base, not of the game itself. People still play Doom and Quake online and they both have STRONG modding communities. Show me a console game released in that era that people are still playing onl- Oh, never mind.
By "Online communities", he doesn't mean the general attitude of the players, he means the tighly knit communities and clans dedicated servers form. That isn't possible when the game throws you into a match with a bunch of random people.

Your information is very skewed and based on rumour.

 

[Runding]

Okay, so I exaggerated the cost slightly. £150 for a graphics card that's lasted you 3 years? I spent the same on an Xbox, 2 controllers and 3 games 2 and a half years ago, and it too has lasted me well. If that's just your graphics card, then I'm pretty sure that another piece of your rig could easily cover my television, and that would not even be your entire rigs cost covered. While I may have exaggerated, you have just nicely proven the point I was intending to make.

And the only person I was intending to be hostile to in that sentence was the makers of said overly expensive computer hardware.

If I'm not mistaken, the retail price of the base Xbox 360 was around $300 mid 2007. That's just the Xbox and the controller, with none of the expensive crap that you need to fully enjoy your console. You must have gotten a very, very good deal if your story is true. That would be a subjective experience that makes you a statistical outlier.

Thank you for bringing up the TV. What kind of a TV do you have? A tube TV from the 80's? If it's not a $1000+ HDTV you aren't even getting close to the same experience that I'm getting with my LCD monitor. The most expensive part of my system, by the way, is my monitor at $200 at the time of purchase. The image quality is far superior to even the extremely expensive HDTVs of the time. Show me a TV that's large enough for couch viewing and is capable of 1080p with a lower retail value than that, and I'll retract this statement. If you want to go cheaper than $1000 on the TV, why shouldn't the PC gamer go cheaper on his system and simply turn the graphics down?

So, for the full experience:
Base Xbox 360 with 1080p HDTV, no HD or Xbox Live stuff - $1300
Mid end PC with 1080p monitor, still far more powerful than a 360 - $800

Your information is very skewed and based on rumour.

I purchased a 28" LCD monitor for my PC last year that set me back about $600... And that was one of the cheapest monitors in that particular size category- check out some nice dell or apple monitors FTW. Mid end PC w/1080p monitor = $800? Yeah, if your gaming on a 17" screen.

 

[LoopyDood]

Okay, so I exaggerated the cost slightly. £150 for a graphics card that's lasted you 3 years? I spent the same on an Xbox, 2 controllers and 3 games 2 and a half years ago, and it too has lasted me well. If that's just your graphics card, then I'm pretty sure that another piece of your rig could easily cover my television, and that would not even be your entire rigs cost covered. While I may have exaggerated, you have just nicely proven the point I was intending to make.

And the only person I was intending to be hostile to in that sentence was the makers of said overly expensive computer hardware.

If I'm not mistaken, the retail price of the base Xbox 360 was around $300 mid 2007. That's just the Xbox and the controller, with none of the expensive crap that you need to fully enjoy your console. You must have gotten a very, very good deal if your story is true. That would be a subjective experience that makes you a statistical outlier.

Thank you for bringing up the TV. What kind of a TV do you have? A tube TV from the 80's? If it's not a $1000+ HDTV you aren't even getting close to the same experience that I'm getting with my LCD monitor. The most expensive part of my system, by the way, is my monitor at $200 at the time of purchase. The image quality is far superior to even the extremely expensive HDTVs of the time. Show me a TV that's large enough for couch viewing and is capable of 1080p with a lower retail value than that, and I'll retract this statement. If you want to go cheaper than $1000 on the TV, why shouldn't the PC gamer go cheaper on his system and simply turn the graphics down?

So, for the full experience:
Base Xbox 360 with 1080p HDTV, no HD or Xbox Live stuff - $1300
Mid end PC with 1080p monitor, still far more powerful than a 360 - $800

Your information is very skewed and based on rumour.

I purchased a 28" LCD monitor for my PC last year that set me back about $600... And that was one of the cheapest monitors in that particular size category- check out some nice dell or apple monitors FTW. Mid end PC w/1080p monitor = $800? Yeah, if your gaming on a 17" screen.

Ahem.
Check out these monitors:
http://www.newegg.com/Store/Category.aspx?Category=19&name=Monitors
And here's my example rig:
https://secure.newegg.com/WishList/MySavedWishDetail.aspx?ID=16561667

$550 rig plus a $200 monitor is $750. That will run Crysis well and look great doing it.

Edit: Sorry that you need to login, but I assure you that it's quite amazing. Quad core, 4GB RAM, 5750 graphics card.

 

[The Maddest March Hare]

Okay, so I exaggerated the cost slightly. £150 for a graphics card that's lasted you 3 years? I spent the same on an Xbox, 2 controllers and 3 games 2 and a half years ago, and it too has lasted me well. If that's just your graphics card, then I'm pretty sure that another piece of your rig could easily cover my television, and that would not even be your entire rigs cost covered. While I may have exaggerated, you have just nicely proven the point I was intending to make.

And the only person I was intending to be hostile to in that sentence was the makers of said overly expensive computer hardware.

If I'm not mistaken, the retail price of the base Xbox 360 was around $300 mid 2007. That's just the Xbox and the controller, with none of the expensive crap that you need to fully enjoy your console. You must have gotten a very, very good deal if your story is true. That would be a subjective experience that makes you a statistical outlier.

Thank you for bringing up the TV. What kind of a TV do you have? A tube TV from the 80's? If it's not a $1000+ HDTV you aren't even getting close to the same experience that I'm getting with my LCD monitor. The most expensive part of my system, by the way, is my monitor at $200 at the time of purchase. The image quality is far superior to even the extremely expensive HDTVs of the time. Show me a TV that's large enough for couch viewing and is capable of 1080p with a lower retail value than that, and I'll retract this statement. If you want to go cheaper than $1000 on the TV, why shouldn't the PC gamer go cheaper on his system and simply turn the graphics down?

So, for the full experience:
Base Xbox 360 with 1080p HDTV, no HD or Xbox Live stuff - $1300
Mid end PC with 1080p monitor, still far more powerful than a 360 - $800

And to the rest of that post - The sentiment of most of it seems to be "It's good enough for me, so it should be good enough for you."
By "Greater longevity of games", he means the logetivity of the online player base, not of the game itself. People still play Doom and Quake online and they both have STRONG modding communities. Show me a console game released in that era that people are still playing onl- Oh, never mind.
By "Online communities", he doesn't mean the general attitude of the players, he means the tighly knit communities and clans dedicated servers form. That isn't possible when the game throws you into a match with a bunch of random people.

Your information is very skewed and based on rumour.

Yes, I admit I did get a very good deal with my xbox, £160 for the set I mentioned, which is about $16 more than your card was.

As for the TV, it's a 32" HDTV set to 1080p. Believe me, I'm getting the same experience as you are. It was $400, meaning my Xbox set up has set me back somewhere in the region of $660, which is much less than your mid end example.

And as for the intended sentiment of my posts, it was more aimed at "while our experiences may vary, you do not have anything that sets PC gaming apart as better, merely as being different". I'm not trying to preach the superiority of consoles, I'm just trying to say that there is nothing about PCs that make them some master gaming machine sent from the heavens as seems to be the general sentiment coming from many PC users in this thread and many others like it.

 

[LoopyDood]

Yes, I admit I did get a very good deal with my xbox, £160 for the set I mentioned, which is about $16 more than your card was.

As for the TV, it's a 32" HDTV set to 1080p. Believe me, I'm getting the same experience as you are. It was $400, meaning my Xbox set up has set me back somewhere in the region of $660, which is much less than your mid end example.

Was the TV in dollars (US, although I'm Canadian) or euros? You've screwed something up there.

Once again, your experience makes you a statistical outlier, therefore exempt from being used as an example. That isn't a deal just anyone can get - Mine is.

Oh, can you give me a link to the TV mentioned?

 

[Ace of Spades]

This is why I just don't play online at all. Not enough enjoyment per hour.

 

[xXGeckoXx]

First a maximum of 9 vs 9? Look at Frontlines Fuel of War. 26 x 26 mp and still the game didn't reach popularity (even though it was a good game). MAG with its projected 256 mp matches and people have reservations. You are blaming MS or Sony for a choice the developers are making. For me Ithink 9 x 9 is enough. With Frontlines you formed an 8 man squad. So even with the other 40 people running around I feel like I am playing with 8. And since the maps were big enough I didn't find myself fighting against more than a few at any given time. Most matches there would be tons of people who I never even saw on the battlefield.

And sure I have had some laggy matches. The system isn't perfect. Although those matches were few and far between and usually involved someone from the UK. most games allow you to see if thier ping is up to snuff and allow you to choose whether you should look for another match.

From where I am sitting XBL is constantly improving. Can't ask for much more than that.

Battlefield 1943 was 24 players I Think and it was downloaded.

 

[911 fox]

being both a console and a pc gamer i have to say pc is better. free mods keep let me keep playing a game long after i have completed the main story. the community is friendly and very halpful. i have yet to go onto a mw2 server where every body says hello. also games are a lot more complex and good quality games are cheaper because of indie developers and steam. and i don't have to payfor gold to get all this sooo,

 

[Misterian]

Misterian:
Nonsense. If you had to spend that much money on hardware, you didn't know what you were doing.

sorry I didn't mean the quote you saw here, someone else said it, I was trying to quote it while making a response to it.

 

[The Austin]

Superior controls and such.

Can you PC gamers sit on the couch and play assassins creed? No.